Paris climate summit: developing bloc demands billions for action

Developing countries have pushed a hardline stance on demands for hundreds of billions of dollars in climate finance.

China, India and developing countries representing 80 per cent of the world’s population have shocked the Paris climate change conference with a united, hardline stance on demands for hundreds of billions of dollars in finance.

Any hopes of a smooth agreement in Paris all but evaporated yesterday as the G77 plus China group released a statement demanding certainty on finance and pushed responsibility for action firmly on to the developed world.

The group wants all issues of ­finance brought into one negotiation. The push-back exposes the deep division between the US, India and others over who should bear responsibility for historical carbon dioxide emissions.

Climate Institute spokesman Erwin Jackson said it had been ­expected that finance and the $US100 billion fund would be a key issue. He said the G77 statement was an opening salvo and both sides would have to give.

“Developed countries needed to find ways to bridge the increase in finance,” Mr Jackson said.

Developing countries had to recognise the world was “evolving”, he added.

The G77 plus China yesterday showed it was in no mood to compromise. A tactical blunder in negotiations in Bonn last month invigorated the G77 plus China bloc. The group rallied after a US-backed draft negotiating text that excluded many of the developing world’s key concerns was released. Developing countries walked out of the Bonn talks until they were allowed to reinsert their ­concerns to the negotiating text. As a result, developed country negotiators in Paris said they were now confronted with an unexpectedly solid opposition bloc.

South Africa’s ambassador, Nozipho Mxakato-Diseko, issued the bluntly worded statement on behalf of the G77 plus China group. Nothing could be achieved “without the provision of means of implementation to enable developing countries to play their part to address climate change” it said. “However, clarity on the complete picture of the financial arrangements for the enhanced implementation of the convention keeps on eluding us.”

The G77 plus China said developed countries had a legal obligation to provide financial resources, including technology transfer and capacity building, to all developing countries. “It is neither ‘aid’ nor ‘charity’, nor is it the same as development assistance,” it said. “Finance support from developed countries relates to the impacts of historical emissions, which will only get worse with time for developing countries.”

The developed world, including Australia, has made it clear it wants to expand the number of countries who will contribute to the finance fund over time. It is also seeking to link finance with better accounting and transparency of actions to curb developing countries’ CO2 emissions.

G77 plus China said it was “deeply concerned” by attempts to introduce economic conditions in the finance section under negotiation. “We should not shift the focus of this meeting away from arresting dangerous climate change and addressing the immediate and urgent need for adaptation and loss and damage,” the group said.

Developing nations said they were confronted with a simplistic narrative that suggested “the world has changed since the UNFCCC was adopted in 1992” due to economic development gains. They said they had been told it was time to expand the pool of so-called donors of climate aid and to narrow the list of those eligible to receive this support to the “poorest of the poor”.

The G77 bloc said: “This narrative serves narrow, national interests of developed countries and says little about reality.”

It said Paris must provide clarity on the level of financial support that developed nations would provided to developing nations. “A substantial scaling up of finance from the 2020 base level of $US100bn per year is required,” it said. “In this regard, developed country parties, have the main responsibility to provide finance that is new, additional, predictable and sustainable.”